ericinexile

I think there must be a "one pass gene" designed into the AI to ensure they aren't completely suicidal by throwing everything they got, including flight manuals and thermos bottles at an enemy who shoots back. Thanks EB for checking it out.

Thanks! I used several search criteria, none of them "troop". Great...thanks again!

I saw previously where someone posted a way to construct waypoints to give the appearance of an infantry drop with a helicopter. I searched for it without luck. I've done it myself but it doesn't look very convincing as I want the appearance of a flare to a hover. Any help is appreciated

Hmmm, I played your mission twice. The first run, he fired both Kh-58s and later jettisoned the 25s after being engaged. On the second run, he fired the Kh-58s but did nothing with the rest of his loadout...perhaps because the 58s did the job. But I am impressed that he at least launched the longer reach weapon first. My first test is similar to yours. Usually, the 4 Kh-25's take out the SAM and negate the need for the 58's. My question, in addition to why aren't both weapons used, is why the shorter range weapon first? But in your test the 58 IS used so perhaps it has to do with target. The second example clearly shows the use of just one bomb type against a point target regardless of distance between points. The problem occurs on the Tu22 as well. (Oddly, and unrelated, Tu22's only fly solo even if you assign a flight of two or more.) Wild_Weazel.miz TEST.miz

I'm guessing here--as we all are really--but I'd guess one of the reasons the Ka50 was retained is has to do with the typical military contractor-government relationship were a lot of money is shoveled into a program and that money and time invested gets ever harder to kiss goodbye by shelving the program. The other reason I think is perhaps they expected the export market to really breath new life into the program. Finally, I wonder if the Comanche didn't offer a reason for a Russian counterpoint for a highly maneuverable single-seat helicopter. We know how that idea turned out.

Got it. You don't need help. You never asked for help. You don't want help. Now, isn't racing helicopters a little like racing shopping carts?

Thread title is confusing but here's the problem. I've noticed that A/I carrying multiple suitable weapons will only use one type on targets and return home with the rest. Two examples: A Tu-22 carrying both 250 kg and 500 kg FABS will only drop one type on a point target (carpet bombing) and keep the rest. Or a SEAD Su-25t carrying kh58 and Kh25MPU will get closer to the SAM in order to launch the shorter range Kh25 but will land (if they survive) with the Kh58s still on wing. HOWEVER, if you loadout the Su-25t with only a pair of Kh58 it will launch at a longer distance from the target than it would have done had it carried the Kh25 as well (and again in this last scenario, the Kh58 will not be used).

Have you tried using one LARGE trigger zone strictly for altitude and others zones for lateral triggers? Maybe the trigger logic currently doesn't like multiple functions for one trigger.

EB, That was fun. Unfortunately I didn't pass because I got distracted by the insurgency in the town and failed to notice the second ****(no spoiler here). Very cool use of infantry. PS--I think I need some engine work done on my Ka50. I still can't climb with a fully loaded Mi26. Smokin' Hole

You can edit your logbook file or you can edit the campaign to start in the next stage then restart the campaign. Neither solution is very pretty.

EB, Is it possible to post this file in zip form?

Chaff would be useless even if the Ka50 DID have a RWS. If you pop up and blow chaff, it will fall right along with you as get back behind cover. Chaff doesn't magically hover above a ridgeline waiting to take a missile so you don't have to. A radar guided missile will generally be fired from a distance and the helo pilot will never see it. By the time the missile is within the pilot's horizon, the motor will have long burned out. Flares on the other hand, at least in the game, can be fired when the smoke plume is spotted. They are designed to increase the pilot's odds in a low-tech MANPAD environment. Having said that, I'd still like to have an RWS just to better be able "see" the battlefield. ...But the chaff can stay in the hanger. Smokin' Hole

Pilot's, at least American pilots, haven't needed knowledge of morse code in at least two generations. Any navaid will have the code charted below the identifier. Pilots just verify the sound matches the charted code.

[q]My wingman OFTEN dies...[/q] You're doing great. My wingman ALWAYS dies. ...But I usually live. And that's a trade-off I'm comfortable with. :)

The throttle tries to maintain a constant rotor RPM as rotor pitch/load varies. The target RPM is determined by the Low/Nominal switch on the collective (I never touch it). Auto throttle is where you should be 99% of the time. If you loose an engine, select High. If you want an amazing decent rate, bottom the collective and select Low. In any case, the throttle setting will affect performance, not maneuverability.

Thinking out of the box there, Boulund. Which sales will be higher based on the review: Macy fans buying DCS or DCS fans buying Macy's books. My guess is the later. Peace.

^^^ Yep. Debrief says 114K. That's some consolation. Even better? The Excellent AI pilots are sooooo bloody stupid. They'll drive right over your head at 80 kts.

That begs another question: the loadout screen for the D model only states "AGM-114" without denoting the missile type. When I'm attacked by Longbow I always get a continuous laser warning. Is that just ED being nice and compensating for the lack of a RWS (doubt that) or is the LB radar used to direct the laser which paints the target for the AGM? Otherwise, why ever get a laser warning with a longbow packing a 114L?

Some units, the one's in the currently played mission need to be "live" just as they are now and limited to 50 or 60 (at least on my rig). The other stuff, i.e the supply chain, replacement parts and personnel, new FLOT line can be "kept" within the 3rd party campaign generator and be processed only after it receives the data from the just completed mission. It will then do its magic, make a new mission incorporating changes, and send the mission to the editor. It's still not dynamic in the Falcon sense but it preserves all the advantages of the DCS battlefield while giving the player(s) a goal that keeps 'em coming back. Smokin' Hole

Really!?!? I need to watch you fly then because I have never outflown more than four shots in row in my Head to Head test mission over a relatively flat portion of Georgia. I have tried beaming at 280 kph, I've tried tuning tail and running, I've tried S-turning with the laser designator striking my left and right rear-quarter aspect and I've tried facing the attacker and translating laterally at 100+ kph. All flown at treetop hight and all resulting in my eventual death. I even tried a loop (which actually did work until a third ATGM smacked me on the pull out.)

A "Discard Mission" Option If you guys are serious about the DCS Campaign engine then please consider allowing a player to back out of a campaign mission without penalty. A dozen times now I've unpaused in the cockpit only to realize my TrackIr wasn't working. Exiting out to fix it stepped me back a stage. What a hassle! Yes I know...I can edit my logbook but that's not really a solution. Thanks, Smokin' Hole

While the the Vikhr might be a better ATGM, it is a far inferior AAM.

Hmmm. While technically true it implies a carryover of battlefield results from one mission to the next. The Macy parts were really interesting. Thanks for the link.

Thanks for all the above advice. As for cover, its not always there when the adversary is at 300m and has a commanding view of a flattish battlefield. I set up a simple H2H at 15km with a AH-64D and I tried everything. It was easy if I just ran away the instant I was lased because the Apaches in DCS fly slow. If there was cover, I could snuggle up to that and settle for the eventual gunfight. But taking on the Hellfire is suicide. There is no spoofing it. Watching the tracks with Tacview is pretty interesting. The missile lofts and then takes on an intelligent track much like a modern AAM (and much unlike the vikhr).

If you search around you'll find a fairly long discussion regarding the feasibility of a DC engine. I too think that a DC capability would be nice particularly in Multiplayer which is currently worthless for co-op gameplay without an evolving, replenishing battlefield. What I took from that previous discussion was that a dynamic campaign is "not impossible" and could possibly be in the form of a third party app which takes the results of one mission and generates a follow-on mission.